No signs Syria’s al-Assad will be overthrown, France says

[cqo_000]

Source: Reuters

France said on Thursday there were no signs that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is about to be overthrown, something Paris has been saying for months was just over the horizon.

France, a former colonial ruler of Syria, has been one of the most vocal backers of the rebels trying to topple Mr. al-Assad and was the first to recognize the opposition coalition.

“Things are not moving. The solution that we had hoped for, and by that I mean the fall of Bashar and the arrival of the [opposition] coalition to power, has not happened,” Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said in his annual New Year’s address to the press.

Mr. Fabius told RFI radio in December “the end is nearing” for Mr. al-Assad. But on Thursday, he said international mediation and discussions about the crisis that began in March, 2011, were not getting anywhere. “There are no recent positive signs,” he said.

Read more: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/no-signs-syrias-al-assad-will-be-overthrown-france-says/article7830079/

[golfguru]

1. Assad must be less murderous than Ghaddafi

since we are not invading Syria to depose Assad.

[fujiyama]

2. Assad is probably ten times worse

It's not a matter of "how murderous" a leader is before the West decides to intervene. It has to do with power dynamics and economics, and no one wants to get involved in a shit hole like Syria - which doesn't have nearly the amount of oil as Libya. Besides Syria is also better equipped militarily - by the Chinese and Russians - than Libya ever was.

Either way the capricious and selective use of force to topple "evil dictators" by Western powers is puzzling and is not helping in stabilizing the region or the world. These civil wars are horrific, and I think China and Russia should be condemned for their actions in supporting the Assad regime, but we're not even sure who the different factions are in this fight.

[ellisonz]

3. It also has a lot more to do with international diplomacy...

...the Assad regime has not been thrown under the bus by Russia and the PRC like Gaddafi. Furthermore, Iran and Syria remain close allies and Lebanon is still unstable. Military action in Syria means substantial regional destabilization with likely disastrous consequences (and yes this will affect economics). In short, you don't throw the baby out with bathwater. BTW - Gaddafi was already selling the oil, the real difference is that he was taking all the profit whereas now that is not going to be the case.

we're not even sure who the different factions are in this fight.

We know quite a good deal about who the factions are in Syria.

[cqo_000]

4. Un chief Ban Ki-moon condemned 'outside powers' over Syria arms.

[quote]
Ban and UN-Arab League mediator Lakhdar Brahimi condemned the weapons suppliers, without naming them directly in a statement on Monday evening.

"Both expressed deep disappointment and anguish at the appalling levels of killing and destruction carried out by both the government and the opposition, fueled by outside powers providing weaponry to both sides," the UN press office said.
[/quote]

http://www.dw.de/un-leader-condemns-syria-arms-suppliers/a-16539436

[golfguru]

16. So we helped deposed Qaddafi because of oil more than murders! n/t

[MADem]

5. They might want to check with the Kurds...sometimes things aren't always as they seem.

I don't think shifting Al Assad will be easy, but I don't think it is necessarily impossible. It may take time, though...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/23/world/middleeast/some-syrian-kurds-resist-assad-defying-conventional-views.html?_r=0

Defying official and popular accounts of Kurdish loyalties, these men fight beside Arabs against Mr. Assad. They and their leaders bluntly denounce the P.K.K., which the United States and Europe consider a terrorist organization, and also criticize many Kurdish nationalists, saying that calls for an independent Kurdistan are not a vision they share.

“We are not interested in a separate homeland,” said Yousef Haidar, 72, Alghooz’s mukhtar, or village elder. ... “For hundreds of years we have lived together with Arabs, and after the revolution we want to live together more.”

The Kurdish revolutionary fighters also reject neutrality, like the public position of the Democratic Union Party, Syria’s largest Kurdish political party, which has largely kept out of the uprising, furthering the impression that Kurds were not supporting the rebels.

“I am Kurdish, and as a Kurdish citizen I am fighting side to side with the Free Syrian Army, because you cannot find anybody who was not stepped on by the regime, or was not wronged,” Mr. Haidar said. “We were wronged as well.”

[triplepoint]

6. Looks Like AssHat Has Made A Deal With France as well...

Last edited Fri Jan 25, 2013, 08:21 PM - Edit history (1)

Maybe it is time for Anonymous and Wikileaks to leak emails to the World concerning France, Russia, and Syria. They leaked some of Assad office emails before....and I'm hopeful they'll do it again....like this:


Hackers leak Assad's astonishing office emails
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9067118/Anonymous-hackers-leak-Syrias-Bashar-al-Assads-astonishing-office-emails-discussing-Barbara-Walters.html

[Tennessee ploughboy]

8. wikileaks and U.S. involvement

something that seems to have slipped under most americans radar is the fact that wikileaks released a number of american e-mails, etc., concerning syria in 2011 showing that this "Arab spring" revolt is actually the result of american efforts to undermine and destabilize the syrian government. when confronted about it (in april, 2011) by a canadian broadcasting system reporter (the "independent" american media would not touch it), a state dept. spokesman claimed that we were simply promoting democracy, but admitted that there "is a fine line" between promotion of democracy and supporting regime change.

a couple of facts need clarifying. assad is not my idea of a leader and dictatorships offend most americans sensitivities, but he has the support of a healthy majority of the syrian people. this is why the rebels aren't getting any traction, despite overt support from the american and european imperialists.

the only country that stands to gain from this mess (i know this will surprise you) is israel. if syria falls to a pro-western coalition, then hezbolla's position in lebanon becomes untenable. there will no longer be a pipeline of supply between iran and hezbolla through syria. in reality, a stable, non belligerent syria is in the u.s's best interests and assad the younger has provided that. it seems unfortunately true, however, that our foreign policy is being greatly influenced by israel and aipac "campaign contributions." to the detriment of u.s. standing and influence around the world.

as long as the independence of american foreign policy is compromised by the mercenary nature of our government and its agents, our influence and effectiveness as a leader in world affairs will continue to diminish. -TP-

[pampango]

9. "he has the support of a healthy majority of the syrian people" - How have you determined this?

From the free elections that Assad and his father held over the decades? From the fact that the opposition has not been able to defeat his army yet?

By those standards all dictators are popular with a healthy majority of their people. (Though I imagine that none of us would be happy to live under a dictator. Arabs are not like us?)

this is why the rebels aren't getting any traction..." - The opposition has not won, but looking at the map of Syria, it would be difficult to say that they are not getting any traction. And they are fighting against one of the most powerful militaries in the Middle East.

...despite overt support from the american and european imperialists." - True although not much in the way of heavy weapons with which to confront Assad's tanks and planes. And, of course, those 'imperialists' in Russia have been pretty generous with their 'overt support' for Assad's regime.

I would acknowledge that there is a fine line between promoting democracy and supporting regime change. I am not sure liberals want to give up supporting democracy but do have to be careful about regime change.

[geek tragedy]

12. If democracy comes to Syria, then the masses will cheerfully keep Baby

Assad in office, right? I mean, people on DU tell us he's wildly popular there.

[John2]

10. This is not

new if people paid attention to our own Government, especially George W. Bush and the neocons. There were dissidents soliciting our government to overthrow the Syrian regime at the same time there were dissidents from Iraq. When the other groups don't have the power to fight the regime, they look at the U.S. because of our supposedly interests and spreading Democracy. Then our sympathies are played on by our religious extremists because of what those dictators do to their people in the name of humanism rights. It is not that I have no heart but you have to be reasonable. The U.S. cannot physically liberate every country in the World, everytime one side gets the short end of the stick in their civil disputes. And in some of these cases, there is no differences in atrocities between one side or the other.

Take Al Qaieda and the Taliban for instance. We helped them overthrow the invasion of the Soviet Union. That is why I favor the U.S. tending more to their own internal problems instead of going around the World Nation building. It is the biggest reason for this so called Debt. If the number of states we liberated paid us back, then we wouldn't have so much Debt. We are alleviating a few countries of their responsibilities to defend their own people also by providing them with defense. This has been our Policy ever since winning World War II. Are we ever going to leave these countries or is this for life? This is equivalent to any other Empire in the World's history. And it takes money and resources to govern it. It also only benefits a few of us, mainly the upperclass.

[geek tragedy]

11. "he has the support of a healthy majority of the syrian people"

Since when did DU become home to authoritarian bootlickers?

[UnseenUndergrad]

13. march or april 2011

After we began intervening in Libya, a portion of this site and the Russian allied Far left was convinced that the entire Arab Spring was some kind of Vast Amerikanski Plot.

Iraq! Oil! Incubators! Islamists! Saudi puppets!

You know the rest.

[geek tragedy]

14. Restore Ben Ali to his rightful place of power! His people love him! nt

[leveymg]

7. A splendid humanitarian intervention. Results = rubble with a dictator.

Congratulations to Hillary, David, Susan and all the rest of the First Term regime changers and neocons. Mission accomplished.

[Xithras]

15. Take your pick. Socialist dictator, Mogadishu style theocracy, or Beirut-style civil war.

Our own government has now admitted that Al Nusrah is a terrorist organization, and the FSA admits that Al Nusrah is the most effective military arm of the rebellion. Al Nusrah has bluntly said that it has no interest in creating a democracy, and intends to create a theocratic sharia state (essentially the same type of government that existed in Afghanistan). Al Nusrah has already claimed responsibility for killing civilians, including journalists and teachers, through both direct executions and suicide bombings, to eliminate or intimidate people who they see as un-supportive of their goals.

Worst case scenario, Al Nusrah finds a way to quickly gain control over the country after Assad falls. Best case scenario, Syria will remain locked in a brutal civil war for years after Assad falls. There is NO scenario in which Assad falls and the country magically becomes a peaceful and civil democratic wonderland. Many leaders within the FSA itself have already admitted as much. Many OUTSIDE commentators have acknowledged that the real Syrian irony, at this point, is that an Assad victory may be the nations only real chance for peace anytime soon.

No matter who wins, the people of Syria lose.